How far will the SPPD go to kiss the St. Pete Times’ ass?
August 30, 2007 at 5:12 pm by Wayne GarciaHow about suspending its records supervisor for 10 days?
The crime, according to cross-Bay rival Tampa Tribune? Bad-mouthing the Times to Times staffer Brendan Watson who had attended a neighborhood meeting about crime watch. Watson was apparently there because he lives in the neighborhood and involved in its crime watch. When he approached police records supervisor Bill Wilson, the following exchange occurred:
In the complaint, Watson said Wilson asked him where he worked. Once Watson responded, Wilson admitted to crossing his index fingers, holding his hands up in front of Watson, taking a step back, and saying, “Not the St. Pete Times,” the documents say.
He then proceeded to tell Watson of the difficulties he had had dealing with employees of the newspaper. Wilson, for instance, said he was delighted that Leonora Minai, a former police reporter, had left the paper to work at Duke University, rather than Wilson’s alma mater, the University of North Carolina, the documents say.
Wilson said he meant his remarks to be lighthearted banter. Watson was offended and filed a complaint with the department. According to the Tribune, he e-mailed it directly to Chief Chuck Harmon — and cc:’ed Mayor Rick Baker.
Heads will roll!!
Aside from the utter hypocrisy of a newspaperman, errrrr, multimedia journalist seeking to silence/punish what appears to be free speech (albeit poorly chosen free speech, in light of the fact that Wilson was dispatched to the meeting in an ongoing attempt to foster better ties with the neighborhood), there is the matter of the dubious wisdom of Wilson offending the one Times employee who has publicly admitted buying a gun for personal safety given his neighborhood (Palmetto Park).
So the score on Brendan Watson stands at Second Amendment, Yea; First Amendment, Nay.
Send to a friend:
August 31st, 2007 at 4:07 pm
UPDATE: The word from a source with direct knowledge is that Watson and a print reporter had their butts chewed for letting the Trib beat the newspaper to publication.
September 3rd, 2007 at 8:29 am
The vast majority of the original reporter’s story on TBO.com is unjustly focused upon a justified citizen complaint. Very little of the reporter’s attention is directed at Wilson’s greater offense of not replacing or removing a mat after an employee tripped over it and sprained her ankle! Wilson just plain didn’t care to do anything about it. As far as Wilson’s comments at the neighborhood meeting, I too was present and can attest, along with several others, to the fact that our “local police official’s” (Wilson’s) comments and gestures during his conversation with Mr. Watson were both condescending and immature. Mr. Watson’s function in attending the neighborhood meeting was not as a St. Pete Times reporter (which he was berated for), but as another concerned neighbor, one who has been robbed three times, had his life threatened by drug dealers. Mr. Watson received a caustic response from Wilson to a simple request for suggestions to better communications between the St. Pete police and a neighborhood riddled with crime.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:19 pm
Matthew — good points, but let me reiterate what (at least I thought) was the thrust of what I wrote, and that is not that Mr. Wilson is without blame or a good example of what a public servant should be. The overarching concern is that we as journalists, which is how Mr. Watson’s actions and complaint have to be viewed, should bemoan how thin-skinned we have become. I hate to sound like an old fogey here, but many scribes took such a complaint in the past as a badge of honor, and not a reason for official sanction. The fact that Mr. Watson was there as a concerned neighbor who has been through hell is not relevant because as a journalist, we give up some of our normal rights as citizens to be involved in public (and some private) affairs because the public is going to view us as always on duty. Mr. Watson’s actions, as a neighbor, reflect on his newspaper, as an entity, and I suspect that some folks on 1st Ave S are uncomfortable with him “speaking” for the paper, however much that may not have been his intention.
Second, I would strongly disagree with your characterization of the mat-tripping offense as “greater.” While it certainly shows a lack of concern and administrative reaction, I doubt (without other unnamed internal issues that may or may not exist) that a 10 day suspension is in order.
Finally, I would also bemoan the way that, in our society today, we don’t settle such differences person to person without immediately going to Def Con status and calling in the authorities. Again, I have no knowledge that Watson did or didn’t have a problem with this official before, but in the absence of that, why not just a telephone call to him to try to settle the matter, saying that he was deeply offended and letting him know that his actions weren’t what Mr. Watson would expect from a public official, either as a taxpayer or as a journalist.